text:
Stellar dust-buster mystifies scientists
Astronomers are baffled by the sudden disappearance of a disc around a distant star that was in the process of forming new planets. Also; discovery of a dark matter filament linking galaxy clusters, and the most distant galaxy ever seen.
Listen Now
Available Formats
- MP3 (00:27:55; 25Mb 616kb)


text:
Our fave baristas pose with the Chewie mug!
While it's commendable to make the world a cleaner place on Earth Day, we want to suggest that fans around the globe do their part every day by taking their favorite Star Wars mug to their usual cafe.
It might not seem a like a huge gesture, but by skipping the usual paper cup you're helping to reduce your carbon footprint, while showing off your Star Wars pride at the same time.
Recently, Starbucks offered free coffee on Free Coffee Day to those customers who brought in reusable mugs, so the crew from Starwars.com headed over to our favorite Starbucks next to the Lucasfilm campus at the Presidio in San Francisco.
Learn more how you can make a difference by drinking from reusable cups!
Check out our photos below:
Adding sugar to the Wookiee.
This mug is not a trap!

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Manteca is home to one of the nation's top McDonald's restaurant managers.
Hani Ayyad, RN, has brought the sum total of his expertise in critical care to the emergency room (ER) and intensive care unit (ICU) at Doctors Hospital of Manteca coming from a hospital in Minot, North Dakota.
All that Fred Karimi wanted was a new copy of Mircosoft Windows loaded onto his computer.
OAKDALE − Oak Valley Community Bank and Eastern Sierra Community Bank's net income for 2011 totaled $5.9 million compared to $4.6 million for 2010.
STOCKTON - More positive economic data at the end of 2011 has raised hopes for the economy, but continued weakness in the housing market, weaker demand for exports, and contracting government spending will prevent the recovery from gathering further momentum according to the Business Forecasting Center at the University of the Pacific.
Residents of the San Joaquin Valley are being asked to pay close attention to residential wood-burning rules as the Valley experiences some of the worst wintertime air quality on record.
OAKDALE, − Daniel J. Leonard has been appointed as a new director of Oak Valley Community Bank.
TULARE - World Ag Expo will celebrate 45 years of Feb. 14-16 in Tulare.
Manteca Ford and Exotic High Line owner Phil Waterford, right, stands with his staff as he presents a check for $6,270 to the students of East Union, Manteca, and Sierra high schools for the Drive One 4 Your School promotion conducted last fall as a school fundraiser to help bridge budget cuts. The next Drive One 4 Your School event is 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. on Saturday, March 3, at the Manteca Fords dealership on North Main Street.
RIPON - Construction is underway transforming the former Mar Val Market in Ripon into a new Dollar Market expected to open sometime in April.
Orthopedic surgeon Dr. Bliss Clark, who moved from Texas to Manteca, has demonstrated his compassion by helping a visiting Oregon high school football quarterback whose insurance was not accepted in California.
make sure you get icon in on bottom
RIPON - Homeowners in San Joaquin are invited to attend a free workshop on Tuesday, Jan.24, to learn about Energy Upgrade California, the new statewide program that helps homeowners save money, reduce energy use and creates local jobs.
Ashley Cargill of Modesto, with family in Ripon, joined the Manteca Bulletin display advertising staff this week.
Ashley Cargill of Modesto, with family in Ripon, joined the Manteca Bulletin display advertising staff this week.
The worst drought in most of our lifetimes has focused attention on how all Californians use, conserve and recycle water. Three years of historically dry winters – and no assurance that the next one will be any better – require each of us to examine how we can preserve this precious resource.
Ron Long climbed into the van parked at the rear of Fagundes Meats and Catering, his voice and imagination filling the empty cab.
It's spring-cleaning time. This year, why not also do some sprucing up of your investments and your overall financial strategy?
Frank Teixeira pulls clumps of thinly sliced tri-tip from a tin with silver tongs, layering it like bricks across a bread roll.
From the front window of his home, Donald Foster watched Popeyes rise slowly from a dirt lot in the Marketplace shopping center.
Permanent life insurance can provide you and your family with longstanding benefits that ultimately provide a greater sense of protection and financial security. Here's an overview of the ways that a permanent life insurance policy can be a valuable option for you and your family.
The mechanics of a gold sluice are simple.
A will is one of the most important documents you'll ever create in your lifetime. Your will can clearly state who will be guardian of your minor children, who will inherit your assets, when they will inherit your assets, and any conditions that must be met for them to receive your assets. Yet, according to a legal services website RocketLawyer.com, almost 50% of Americans do not have a will.
Whether you're a parent planning for a child's education or a small business owner poised for growth, one thing is certain-there's not much you can do to control the future. The good news is, there's plenty you can do to prepare for it.
If you're a parent of a special needs child you're probably well aware of how complicated and expensive it can be to make sure your child has the proper care. And often times this is a lifelong commitment. From housing, to healthcare, to even the most basic everyday needs-all these expenses add up. And while it may be tough to meet these obligations now, imagine how hard it would be without your income. That's where a special needs trust can help.
At some point, many people with retirement or employer-sponsored investment accounts will be faced with the decision of what to do with rollover funds. This can happen when you change jobs and cash out a 401(k), or when you retire. In either case, it's important to think through your options. Ideally, it's best to choose a strategy that meets your retirement needs, minimizes the impact of taxes, and avoids penalties.
Page 1 of 1


text:
The world's most trusted source in collecting
(09-14-2011 05:49 PM)nuccionino Wrote: I mean its rare to buy one box, get the case hit, and still not break even. In almost any product you will break even. So far, not liking what I'm seeing
(09-15-2011 12:41 AM)Canucklehead Wrote: I think the verdict is The Cup > Dominion.
Dominion design really stinks I think


text:
Choose a Player Format. You can include scrollable thumbs with the player showing all videos that are availabe for the artist / playlist.
Extract of the album New Face. Music and arrangements Robert Lauri. Video editing Anna Clara Passarelli. More info and links on http://www.robert-lauri.com/musicaluniverses/
Please confirm and accept the use of cookies on MUZU.TV for a better experience. You can read our cookie policy here.
Signing In
We are signing you in, please wait.
Your sign in details are incorrect
Forgotten password?
Signing you out...


text:
illustrate how you are feeling today in pictures, plz. this is how i'm feeling today (that's me in the bottom-right corner):
your turn!
Share Twitter
Views: 1641
▶ Reply to This
▶ Reply
That picture made me MAD. I can't explain why exactly, but it did.OnlyinPinkerton said:
yeah, i just have the feeling that i am a sith lord playing bagpipes on a unicycle.....
Dr. Barack Lurkom, PhD said:
Girls are evil and only like abusive dickbags, so I'm just gonna eat everything in the house
a w y e a h
▶ Reply to Discussion
Welcome toWeezer
Sign Upor Sign In
Or sign in with:
Your browser does not support iframes. Click here to sign up.
© 2014 Created by Weezer.
Badges |
Report an Issue |
Terms of Service
Please check your browser settings or contact your system administrator.


text:
There are no items currently in your bag.
Silky in texture and quickly absorbed, this luxurious body moisturizer softens, soothes and subtly fragrances the skin with OSCAR. Use along with the Oscar signature fragrance and the scent will last throughout the day.
Fragrance Notes:
· Top: Sparkling Ginger Orchid, Lily of the Valley, Bergamot, Hyacinth
· Heart: Jasmine, Orange Flower, Rose
· Base: White Amber, Musk, Sandalwood
There are no items currently in your bag.


text:
Designed to help newlyweds entertain happily ever after, this inspiring book makes an ideal wedding or bridal shower gift. It's organized in three parts – parties, outdoor entertaining and special occasions – and lavishly photographed. The 60 recipes are geared toward young newlyweds, and each of the 12 menus features a detailed work plan accompanied by wine-pairing suggestions and advice on party organization and table decorations. Informative introductory sections cover all the basics, from event planning and invitations to the fundamentals of table setting. Hardcover, 192 pages.
This item is shipped from our warehouse by UPS to arrive within five business days of our receiving your order.
The shipping rate varies depending on your order total and shipping destination. View Shipping Options and Charges.
For an additional charge of $15 per address, we can rush delivery to most destinations. This service is not available for some oversize items, items shipped directly from the supplier (including perishable and custom-manufactured items), out-of-stock items and items to be shipped outside the contiguous 48 states.
At Williams-Sonoma, we take great pride in the quality and craftsmanship of our products. If, within 30 days, you are not completely satisfied with your purchase for any reason, please return the item for an exchange or refund of the merchandise value. View Full Return Policy.
|Flat-Rate Delivery Fee
|Williams-Sonoma Bride & Groom Entertaining


text:
Meet the new Blur TRc, Highball 29er carbon hardtail, and aluminum Tallboy
The "New Bike Development Department" at Santa Cruz has been busy. And altough their O-fficial launch still a few weeks out, the Interweb at large has spilled the frijoles and details of three brand new bikes are now becoming available.
Edit: Pricing information is starting to come online. Blur TRc frames (with shock) start at $2,699, and completes start at $3,799; Highball frames begin at $1,899, with completes starting from $3,099; Aluminum Tallboys will start at $2,299 complete (!) built up with a Deore 10-speed drivetrain and RockShox Recon fork.
A direct descendant of the Blur LT (a 140mm/5.5-inch trail bike), the new Blur TRc takes travel down a notch to 130mm (5 inches even) and tightens up the geometry to make the already climb-hungry VPP bike even more amenable to going uphill. Santa Cruz has convincingly proved that its carbon fiber program is pretty well dialed in—and the combination of a tapered headtube along with the inherent stiffness of the black magic material already made the BLT one of the stiffest carbon trail bike frames out there. Bringing travel down a tad will only make for a stiffer, tighter, whippier ride.
Santa Cruz chose to enter the 29er world with the full-suspension carbon Tallboy, skipping the hardtail step that most companies chose to wade into the fray with. And while the Tallboy garnered rave reviews, there's still a very viable case to be made for having a 29er hardtail in the quiver. Meet the Highball, a whole new bike from Santa Cruz centered around a 2.4-pound carbon frame sure to weaken the knees of 29er lovers from coast to coast. As Santa Cruz wordsmith Mike Ferrentino puts it in the official press release: "Anyone who complains about a bad day climbing while riding this bike needs to find another sport. The Highball is insanely light, razor sharp, nimble but surefooted, stiff as a plank, and designed to do two things: 1. Race. 2. Win."
Last but not least, the aforementioned Tallboy is now available in a more affordable aluminum frame. Again, we're still waiting on final pricing, but Santa Cruz claims the Tallboy AL will be "a whole lot less money" than the $2,350 frame-and-shock base price of the carbon version. Much has been written about what a hit the carbon edition of the Tallboy has been. And the new alloy version brings that same big-wheeled, 100mm-travel, VPP-equipped bona-fides to an even broader group of riders.
Stay tuned from more reports, including initial ride impressions of these three bikes, later this week.
Tags: aluminum tallboy, Blur TRc, Bringing Sexy Back, geometry, Highball, Mike Ferrentino, santa cruz bikes, Santa Cruz mountain bike launch, Tallboy, VPP


text:
Horowitz: Restore Unemployment Benefits to Long-Term Unemployed
Tuesday, January 07, 2014
Senator Reed, in an e-mail sent out to constituents and donors this weekend, said, "These 1.3 million Americans want to get back to work. These are our friends, our families, and our neighbors. All they need is a helping hand through these tough times." Echoing Reed's comments in his weekly radio address, President Obama remarked, "We don't abandon our fellow Americans when times get tough—we keep the faith with them until they start that new job."
The Emergency Unemployment Compensation Program is now completely funded by the federal government and provides extended unemployment benefits to the long-term unemployed—those who have been out of work for 27 weeks or more—whose original benefits have run out. Congress typically makes this type of emergency funding available during periods of high unemployment. The current iteration of this program was launched at the beginning of the Great Recession in 2008.
Time to act
While the economy is improving and long-term unemployment is beginning to decline, it is premature to pull the plug. The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that there are still nearly 3 unemployed workers for every job opening, reports The Washington Post's Wonkblog. Further, the nation's long-term unemployment rate remains as high as it's been at any point since World War II. It is now about twice as high as the long-term unemployment rate was at the times emergency unemployment benefits were cut off in the last three recessions, according to Chad Stone, Chief Economist at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Cutting off these benefits is also a drag on the economy. Economists estimate that we are losing up to $1 billion a week. This money is spent immediately and has a significant multiplier effect.
Congress must act quickly to adopt Senator Reed's legislation and provide individuals and families who are truly on the edge essential support The next step is negotiating a bi-partisan compromise to provide the approximately $25 billion to extend emergency unemployment benefits for all of 2014. In order to attract sufficient Republican votes, this will likely require identifying down-the-road offsetting budget savings so our long-term debt is not increased. This is a doable task—one critical to keeping the many people still being hurt by the lingering effects of the Great Recession afloat.
Rob Horowitz is a strategic and communications consultant who provides general consulting, public relations, direct mail services and polling for national and state issue organizations, various non-profits and elected officials and candidates. He is an Adjunct Professor of Political Science at the University of Rhode Island.
Related Slideshow:
10 Questions Raimondo Has to Answer When Running for Gov of RI
Related Articles
- Rob Horowitz: 5 More Reasons for New Year's Optimism
- Rob Horowitz: A Teaching Lesson at Brown
- Rob Horowitz: At Last: A National Budget Agreement
- Rob Horowitz: Campaign To Strangle Obamacare In Its Crib Will Fail
- Rob Horowitz: Chafee Takes Himself Out of the Game Too Soon
- Rob Horowitz: Chris Christie's Big Moment Is Coming Soon
- Rob Horowitz: Climate Change On the Table… Finally!
- Rob Horowitz: Comprehensive Immigration Reform Is Back
- Rob Horowitz: Finally, Some Common-Sense Drug Sentencing
- Rob Horowitz: Food Stamps Are the Wrong Political Football
- Rob Horowitz: Government Shutdown A Disaster for House Republicans
- Rob Horowitz: House Republicans Hold Debt Ceiling Hostage—Again
- Rob Horowitz: Kennedy: A Vision of What We Can Do Together
- Rob Horowitz: King, Obama + Citizen Activism
- Rob Horowitz: Newtown- One Year Later
- Rob Horowitz: Obama Leads National Conversation on Trayvon Martin
- Rob Horowitz: Obama Steps Up on Climate Change
- Rob Horowitz: Obamacare—Hold the Shovels
- Rob Horowitz: RI's Minimum Wage Boost Good News For Families
- Rob Horowitz: Rhode Island's Self-Esteem Campaign Needs More Money
- Rob Horowitz: Speaker Boehner Joins the Shutdown and Default Caucus
- Rob Horowitz: States Stepping Up On Climate Change
- Rob Horowitz: Time To Find Common Ground, Congress
- Rob Horowitz: Tough Fight Coming On Immigration Reform
- Rob Horowitz: Trust in Media Near an All Time Low
Enjoy this post? Share it with others.
Mark D
Here's a thought, how about Senator Reed actually doing something that would help the state. Oh I don't know, like lowering the worlds highest corporate tax so we can CREATE JOBS!
David Beagle
Ponder this. Many unemployed folks have had to cut spending in their own households to put food on the table, to make ends meet. They have cut cable TV to pay the oil man. They HAVE to make sacrifices. What is wrong with asking democrats to cut something else in order to pay for extended unemployment benefits?
Dave Barry
Find a way to pay for them and I'm all for it. But at some point you have to call it quites. Study after study shows that people will continue to collect instead of taking any job. That is why McDonalds is hiring even in this economy.
Killary Klinton
Best cure for unemployment is a job, but under the current Progressive Democratic rule, this cannot happen.
Democrats and their sheep are more worried about global warming, free birth control and legalizing pot.
Hey Robbie - look where the jobs are plentiful in this country and you'll see there are no Progressives liberals like you and Jackie Reed residing there.
Hopefully the low information voters will be so stoned they don't show up for the mid-term elections and the real America can be rid of these Progressive Democrats.
Remember the biggest lie of 2013 was when Barack Hussein Obama and all his cult-like followers stated, "If you like your health plan, you can keep it. If you like your doctor, you can keep him. PERIOD."
Redd Ratt
Start deporting people here illegally that are taking jobs from people with the legal right to work. If there are 11,000,000 illegals, finding 1,500,000 to deport shouldn't be that hard. Then we can have full employment. Problem fixed,,,,next!
Johnny cakes
Did Congress ever find a war or weapon's system they didn't like? They never seem to worry about the deficit then, do they?
Congress doesn't understand the multiplier effect from paying unemployment benefits. This doesn't keep people employed or create jobs, only corporate tax cuts do?
They need desperate people to drive down the cost of labor, and people without opportunities to fill the ranks of the military with fodder who will kill and die for the monied interests they serve.
And some of the geniuses on here want to help them.
So let me get this straight: Congress is very concerned about the deficit they created with unfunded wars, trillion dollar tax cuts and bailouts for those who created this Great Recession. And they want to fill this hole by taking from those who are the victims of their policies.
Mister Horowitz do you mind paying higher property and utility taxes to pay for the long term unemployed?..can you provide a job for some unemployed person?
Killary Klinton
"Congress doesn't understand the multiplier effect from paying unemployment benefits."
Using this ignorant liberal mindset, working people should quit their jobs, then go on unemployment insurance.
It's an economic multiplier right?
Liberalism: A mental disorder.
Donn Roach
Look - I understand the need to extend these benefits, but come on, as someone said earlier we need to focus on jobs. This is only an economic multiplier when reflected against the fact that THESE PEOPLE CAN'T FIND A JOB!!
Job creation must be the focus.
David Beagle
With the "economic multiplier" effect, Rhode Island should be an economic power house by now. I heard that Obama Care now covers liberalism under mental illness.
Johnny cakes
I wonder if those on this site realize that these people were all previously employed. You can't refer to them as "the takers." Let those who created this crisis pay for it, they're making record profits. But you wouldn't think of pointing the finger where it belongs, you give the real parasites a pass. Why? Are you so ill-informed you have no idea who created this depression?
I also wonder if you would feel differently if you and your family needed the extended benefits. We should just say screw them while you sit comfortably in your heated house talking shit. You and the immoral people that rule are arrogantly in need of a moral compass.
Killary Klinton
The creation on this depression lies 100% in government intervention in the free market.
eg. The idiotic "global warming" policies of the communist in chief is a major reason for the continued depression we are in. Ask the coal workers who are out of a job because of Obama's war of coal.
Maybe you liberal social justice occupiers should ask Moochelle Obama and her family to fork out the $800,000 it's going to cost the US tax payers to fly Air Force 2 from DC to Hawaii to pick her up and take her back from her vacation
That alone would help out a lot of unemployed people in Rhode Island.
Liberals are always willing to spend other peoples' money but never their own.
Redd Ratt
No comments from the morally corrupt liberals regarding my plan to deport people here illegally to create jobs for Americans and legal immigrants looking for work. Its sound reasoning that we can all agree with. Also, if your unemployment runs out, consider becoming under employed for a while. No shame in flipping burgers. Honest work, that's what I say.
Silence Dogood
Reid hasnt had a real job in over 30 years. He has no idea what taxes are, to him they are nothing but definitions to put into actions. These benefits continue to promote a society that lacks any motivation for self sufficiency. Then again, this is an adjunct professor spewing the typing points he was handed.
Joseph Bernstein
I am a conservative-my positions on immigration and gun control and crime are pretty clear-but-and I hate to agree with a progressive like Horowitz on anything-unemployment recipients are working people laid off due to the poor economy brought about by the banksters on Wall Street;NAFTA,the WTO;and spending on foreign wars in countries that hate us.I support tax incentives for REAL private enterprise-companies that make things or deliver real goods(like Amazon) and employ people at good wages.America used to be the fabricator for the world and now we are being reduced to a service economy-want a job in a casino?Gambling as a growth industry-sign of a death spiral.
Redd Ratt
Joseph, I understand. Lets just pay for it.
Sammy Arizona
The Republicans think the unemployed are a bunch of lazy worthless moochers and they say so every day on Fox News... every time a camera is on them... every time a mic is up to their mouth...they don't give a hoot about your your age... the color of your skin... to them... the unemployed are all leftist democrats... and should be punished to being so.
Americans don't need more of "Mr Hollywood" Ronald Reagan's "trickle down economics". We already know it doesn't work, new lip stick won't make that pig look attractive again.
Joseph Bernstein
@Redd-if we had e Verify nationwide we might not have to pay for it-unauthorized applicants would be turned away-we could actually require all currently employed people to be checked-lots of jobs would open up.If we grant amnesty it's all over with.
Jeremy Soninjer
The 6th year of Obama's presidency, after those massive "stimulus" bills and food stamps and extended unemployment benefits, and here we are: STILL TALKING ABOUT UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS. Republicans don't think everyone on the government doll is lazy (many are though). Republicans just realize that these crap policies DON'T WORK.
Rowley had the best take on this the other day - http://www.golocalprov.com/politics/rowley-wealth-reed-istribution-ri-senator-enrolls-in-socialism/
Killary Klinton
It's been proven time after time - when you extend unemployment benefits, the time it takes an individual to take a job also extends. When you short the time frame of benefits, so do the time frame for finding a job.
Too bad cult-like Obama liberals just can't see through the obfuscation this administration spews. They not only drink the Kool-aid, they spread it around for their kids.
Those who do not learn from the mistakes of past are destined to repeat it. RE: Communism and a centralized government killed the USSR and it will also destroy the USA if the Rolling Stone liberals have their way.
Michael Byrnes
Dear Mr. Arizona,
You hyperbole and ability to make up "facts" greatly exceeds the logic of your comments. "Republicans think the unemployed are a bunch of lazy worthless moochers and they say so every day on Fox News…". Occasionally I watch Fox News and have never heard anyone say such a thing. Out there in the real world some of the unemployed are "lazy worthless moochers…". Unlike you I am not shocked to find this out, but with your detachment from reality this is not surprising. Consider the following - North Carolina reduced their unemployment benefits and their unemployment went from 8.9 percent to 7.4 percent. South Carolina did the same thing, reduced their unemployment 3.5 points. Missouri did the same thing, reduced their unemployment benefits, so their unemployment went down 2.5 points. Maybe there is a message here for you and the State of RI. Finally ponder this. England had a very significant growth in people being on disability. Notices were sent to those folks saying that everyone's case would be reviewed. Fully one third dropped their disability, 55% of the remainder were found fit to work and another 25% were found to be able to perform limited work. You think they were gaming the system or mooching even? I hope your were not offended by my use of the word "work".
G Godot
How to knock off working two years before you "retire" - collect extended unemployment benefits. Interesting to note the Belo (for now) "Truth O Meter" says is essence "Republican voting states are POOr and Democrat voting states are RICH".......what the bleep happened HERE?????????


text:
Aimed at technical divers, this system can face any dive situation with rock-solid performances and outstanding reliability. The G260 is a new balanced adjustable second stage featuring metal components for excellent cold water resistance (inlet tube, orifice, inhalation control knob and hose connector). It's high performance makes it a choice for all demanding divers and it will be the natural choice for G250 fans. The new left-right hose attachment option makes it ideally suited for tech diving configurationsMK25/G260
Engineered by divers for divers, the SCUBAPRO Meridian performs advanced functions in timeless style above and below the surface. Use Meridian as a multi-function wrist watch, dive in SCUBA, APNEA or GAUGE modes-SCUBAPRO delivers the best.Discover all MERIDIAN features
Over 40 years of experience, engineering expertise and an unwavering commitment to quality goes into every piece of our premium XTEK line of technical diving equipment. The XTEK line includes Buoyancy Systems, Interchangeable Harnesses, Plates & Wings as well as a range of useful accessories.See all XTEK products
A great fin that combines classic SCUBAPRO fin technology with the latest innovations in hydrodynamic design. Seawing Nova has the power, acceleration and maneuverability of a paddle fin with the comfort and effortlessness of a split fin. The articulated joint allows the blade to pivot and the entire blade generates thrust.Discover the Seawing Nova Fin
Comfortable like a wetsuit, but keeps you warm & water tight like a dry suit. Everdry4 was created for demanding recreational divers wanting easy-to-wear advanced dry suit protection.Discover the comfort of Everdry 4
FOR DESTINATIONS NEAR AND FAR Enjoy optimum comfort and functionality on any dive with this new, front-adjustable BC. Its flexible jacket adjusts to a range of suit thicknesses and includes an integrated weight system. Built tough, with a soft, compact design for easy traveling. It's the one BC you'll need for home and away.Learn why Equator is miles ahead.
Follow SCUBAPRO on twitter
Watch our videos on SCUBAPRO's YouTube Channel
Download the free SCUBAPRO Dealer Locator iPhone app, with SCUBA units converter


text:
Most Viewed Stories
Victorville to get $54M in power plant suit
City settles litigation with Foxborough design firm
VICTORVILLE • The city of Victorville will receive $54 million from the designer of the failed Foxborough power plant, after the City Council approved a settlement offer during a closed session meeting Friday afternoon.
While the award won't right all of the city's financial woes, Mayor Ryan McEachron said "it's a huge step in the right direction."
Victorville sued design firm Carter & Burgess in 2009 after losing an estimated $120 million in an attempt to build the Foxborough power plant, intended to generate electricity for businesses at a discounted rate.
A jury in Riverside Superior Court unanimously awarded the city $52.1 million in damages in December 2010, following a seven-week trial. The judge later tacked on another $1.8 million in attorney's fees and costs, bringing the total settlement to nearly $54 million.
Carter & Burgess appealed the award and has been trying to fight it ever since, while also making repeated settlement offers to the city — all of which were reviewed and denied during closed session meetings. Meanwhile, the city touted the fact that interest was accruing at 10 percent, hoping to get upwards of $64 million if the judgment stood.
Victorville called Friday's special meeting after receiving a written settlement offer for $54 million from Carter & Burgess, according to City Attorney Andre de Bortnowsky. The council agreed to accept the offer on a 4-1 vote, with Councilwoman Angela Valles voting no over disagreement with forgoing the interest payment.
"I voted against the agreement because I was told we could get another $10 million and that we were getting $15,000 a day in interest," Valles said. "The attorneys told me our case was rock solid. I was told we could just sit back and wait for the appeal to be thrown out and then we could collect. Then all the sudden it changed and they wanted to settle, and I'm not comfortable with that."
McEachron acknowledged that Victorville walked away from a hefty interest payment by accepting the settlement. However, he said the rest of the council felt it wasn't worth risking $54 million on the chance that Carter & Burgess' appeal was upheld.
The city entered into a contract with Carter & Burgess in March 2003 for planning, construction management, design and engineering work on three city utility projects, including Foxborough.
Foxborough was originally touted as a $22 million cogenerational power plant at Foxborough Industrial Park, located between Hesperia Road and the Mojave River. The plant was supposed to be completed in 2006, attracting jobs and tax revenue to the city by offering city-generated electricity 10 percent below Southern California Edison rates.
In 2007, with costs skyrocketing and construction on the plant halted forever, Victorville ended its contract with Carter & Burgess and hired Orange County-based Inland Energy to take over.
In March 2008 Carter & Burgess filed a civil suit against the city, claiming it was still owed $107,000 for work performed under the contract.
In June 2009, Victorville attorneys filed a cross-complaint, citing breach of contract, negligence, fraud and more, with the city seeking to recover a portion of the $120 million spent on construction, equipment and operation costs, plus attorney fees and punitive damages for the claims of fraud and negligent misrepresentation.
"We brought on a consultant that didn't advise us properly," McEachron said, grateful the jury recognized that fact.
However, Valles argued that by settling the case, Carter & Burgess isn't left with the same "scarlet letter" on its record as the company would have had the battle played out to the end in court.
"Now they can go to another city and do what they did to us," she said. "These people have to be stopped."
Victorville plans to use the settlement to help reduce the hefty debt it accumulated in trying to build the plant.
The first $30 million will go to pay down an $83 million bond debt issued for the plant's construction, a city press release states. The remaining $24 million will be used to pay back some $22.5 million in interfund borrowing and to shore up the city's general fund.
"There is still work to be done," City Manager Doug Robertson said in an emailed statement, "but we are happy to have the majority of our financial difficulties behind us."
Brooke Edwards Staggs may be reached at (760) 955-5358 or at email@example.com.
Get complete stories every day with the "exactly as printed" Daily Press E-edition, only $5 per month! Click here to try it free for 7 days. To subscribe to the Daily Press in print or online, call (760) 241-7755, 1-800-553-2006 or click here.


text:
1274 Persian Dr, Sunnyvale, CA | Directions 9408937.406090 -121.996850
Eaten with a careful combination of soup spoon and chopsticks, this pho is wholesome, zesty and mega cheap. – The Cuisine:
The basic soup comprises a big tangle of soft, pale white rice noodles immersed in a rich beef broth made from simmered shinbones. With each bowl of soup comes a plate of bean sprouts, basil leaves, lime wedges, and rounds of jalapeno to doctor the flavor.
Bites We Like:
The most accessible pho comes with slices of eye of round steak, but the gelatinous beef tendon, tripe or simple meatball soups are the bomb.
The Location
It's a big, nondescript box of a restaurant crowded with tons of tables. The restaurant is located in your average, run-down strip mall that also includes the excellent Chubby's Broiler burger joint.
Sign in with Facebook Sign in with Facebook to see what your friends are up to!
Do you have a review of Pho-Binh Beef Noodle on your blog? If you include the Citysearch image link (shown below) in your post, we'll automatically link to your review from the business profile page. Here's how our Linkback system works:
The Linkback system is free and automatic. It's really that easy.
To link to our business profile page, copy the html below to your web page.


text:
Shirt and Cargo Pants Set (12-24M)
Free Shipping on all orders $75+ w/code FREESHIP75
You want him looking his very best on important days, so just put him in this adorably sweet plaid shirt and cargo set for photo-ready style. He'll be all smiles and picture-perfect in this outfit.
• Collared shirt and cargo pant set
• Tee: Plaid button-down. Spread collar. Short sleeves. Patch pocket and logo at chest. Button front closures.
• Shorts: Convertible cargo pant with button tab closures. Elasticized waist. Two cargo pockets. Two back mock flap pockets.
• Tee: 100% Cotton. Shorts: 100% Cotton
• Machine wash
Style # GYV00372I
- Need Help? Contact Customer Service
- Returns
- Billing & Shipping
- Gift Cards
- Size Chart


text:
I really want to like Pentax, but what where they thinking?. K-mount and no EVF? Really? That makes this camera only of interest to those already invested in Pentax glass. Pentax needs to broaden their market and they had an opportunity to do so with this camera but they didn't, sadly.
If this camera was "universal mount" like the NEX then I would have seriously considered it as it would give provided a mirrorless platform with an APS-C sensor and IBIS, which would have made it a unique and truly appealing camera. So sad Pentax. I'll have to stick with my NEX and E-PL2 for now.
|Previous news story Next news story
Just Posted: Pentax K-01 review
Just posted: our sixteen-page Pentax K-01 review. In the third of our collaborative reviews with the Digital Camera Resource Page's Jeff Keller, we look at Pentax's first large-sensor mirrorless camera, the 16MP APS-C K-01. The K-01 is unusual for a mirrorless camera in that it uses a preexisting lens mount - so it has to be the same depth as a DSLR, despite the lack of mirror. The idiosyncratic approach is emphasized by the camera's unconventional styling by designer Marc Newson, but what's the K-01 like to use, when you get past its looks?
The use of the full-depth K-mount means the camera is immediately compatible with the many K lenses made Pentax and other brands over the decades. However, this added depth limits the options for adapting other lenses, as is popular with other mirrorless systems.
Click here to read our Pentax K-01 review
This review is based on one originally published at the Digital Camera Resource Page, enhanced with a full set of our own product images, our usual studio comparisons and an expanded samples gallery, plus the addition of a standard dpreview score.
I really want to like Pentax, but what where they thinking?. K-mount and no EVF? Really? That makes this camera only of interest to those already invested in Pentax glass. Pentax needs to broaden their market and they had an opportunity to do so with this camera but they didn't, sadly.
Ok, I'll chime in. Many have commented that the K-01 misses the point of a mirrorless camera, which is apparently to be small. If that is indeed the point, then Pentax already has an answer to that in another camera, the Q. I'll admit, I don't "get" the mirrorless craze. For me, IQ is paramount, all other consideration like size must take a back seat.
One thing that hasn't drawn a lot of attention is that the K-01 utilizes an APS-C sized sensor which affords better DoF control than a μ4/3 or smaller sensor found in many mirrorless systems. The other thing that is largely overlooked is the camera body is only part of the equation when it comes to IQ, a small part at that. The larger part of that equation is the glass you mount on it, and here is where the K-01 shines.
That being said, I don't want the thing; too small for me and no viewfinder, but my point is Pentax obviously has a different target market in mind than the typical mirrorless camera buyer. The K-01 is about great glass.
The Q is the smallest ILC, sure. But it fails in the other goal of mirrorless systems - better IQ than a regular point and shoot.
We already had really small cameras with PnS quality and we already had small DSLR sized cameras with good image quality and liveview. So the K01 and the Q offers us nothing.
The Q has on average, better IQ than a regular point and shoot and even dedicated ones like the Panasonic LX5 (though that will probably change with the next LX model).
The Q actually offers a lot. It offers the smallest camera you can pretty much wear with the *best* photographer centric ergonomics in its class and even above. And it has other surprises- like a very fast flash sync (internal 1/2000 with the premium lenses and external - as high as most DSLR's at 1/250th!). Solid build. Excellent ergonomics. High quality small lens. Invisible.
It's great for street life.
And at ISO 6400 you can still use it in some shots and outclasses the other point and shoots for sure.
Regardless of the rating, DPR using a DCR review is unconscionable. They can try to rationalize it all they want but it's just wrong. The end result is that there is an appearance of "two" reviews out there in the market place when there is in reality just one. It's not fair to the manufacturer or the buying public.
People complain there's not enough reviews. People complain if we try to pay for more in-house writers to produce those reviews by selling advertising (every time we increase the amount / size of ads for a day the comments switch from 'you're not doing enough' to 'here's how to block ads'). We decided to syndicate and expand on Jeff's excellent reviews to cover products that would have otherwise slipped the net. This was done for all the right reasons, and to describe it as 'unconscionable' is unfair.
@Simon Joinson
You wouldn't have reviewed the K-01?
I'd have thought something that unusual would merit a review before the latest minor iteration of a DSLR/SLT series.
BTW "unconscionable" is a ridiculous term to use. DPR has been very clear what this review is.
It may have been reviewed, but not soon. There are plenty of cameras ahead of it in the queue and, in a Photokina year where you can expect a lot of cameras to be launched, there is a chance it might have joined the infamous list of cameras we've not managed to review.
Ok, thanks for the reply. I'd prioritize the new or different ahead of the usual upgrades, but thanks for explaining.
@Simon- I agree Jeff Keller does high quality reviews, even if I disagree with him a bit on some aspects of the K-01 review :-)
Simon, it's fine if you want to syndicate and expand on Jeff's talents. But then have contract terms that stipulate he can not publish the same review under the DCR banner. It's just not right having the same review come from two different sources. It appears as if there are two independent objective reviews when in fact that is not the case. Yes I know you stated from DCR but we both know how search engines work.
If it had Nikon or Canon on the name plate, I think things would have gone allot differently.
My only objection to the review is that while the AF may not be as fast, the manual focus with the focus peaking on this camera is really good. I think when manual focus is that good that should be taken into account.
Yes, but the Sony NEX-5N costs $50 less with an 18-55mm lens than the K-01 does body-only (comparing MSRPs, to be fair). The 5N offers essentially identical image quality, focus peaking that also works in video (video that is also much better). It's smaller, has a customizable interface, can be used with a much wider range of legacy lenses and comes with a lens it can autofocus properly.
Yet the NEX has a much smaller dedicated lens base (about 8, I think), and you're out of luck if you want to use a flash. It wasn't important enough to mention it, right? ;)
@Richard- except that the focus peaking of the K-01 works better overall, into lower light than the Sony Nex 7. Given that, you correct me here, the Nex 5n focus peaking probably works about same- meaning as light goes lower you start losing the focus area which is what I saw for myself comparing both. This is why I brought it up as an advantage- because its focus peaking seems better.
Moreover, if we want to go a bit further- the lens that the K-01 gives you at its price with a lens is much better than Sony's lens. Most Sony Nex mount lenses will make the camera feel and be actually bigger than say a K-01 with pancake primes.
And I am not going to agree with you the K-01 doesn't come with a lens it can't autofocus properly because the AF with it seemed pretty reasonable to me.
Finally the ergonomics from a photographer centric point of view on the Sony, its interface is *worse* than the K-01 even with the K-01 quirks.
Finally as far as the wide selection of lenses, I don' think the K-01 lenses that made for the K-mount are a "little selection" and in fact, have some rather unique lenses (the primes).
Most Sony Nex mount lenses are not very good. Except the Carl Zeis one and the other recent Sony lens one, the others aren't really all that good. Yes, I have used them first hand, this is not me trying to guess anything.
The NEX has the lenses that most of it's users seem to want (no big teles ain't a problem for them I imagine) The flash might be an issue yes, but NEX-F3 has it, so... I'm a Pentax guy, and I would buy a K-01 for any reason... specially with the K30 being announced and a K-x replacement being announced in the next few months...For me the K-01 has to be completely rethought, Why not a APS-C compact Video camera with K mount? That I would buy in a heartbeat!
@Sergio- my point is most of the Sony Nex lenses aren't very good. The good ones- as usual, are pricey (so are Pentax's though Pentax has some more affordable high quality options also).
But I think it's a bit unfair banging the K-01 for example in size, when its size is not too big and with the lenses available for it, it's smaller than Sony Nexes with several of its lenses.
This amongst other things- as I mentioned, the focus peaking experience seems better to me than Sony's Nex-7's.
I think for R Butler to suggest that the lenses don't AF correctly is unprofessional and misleading. Most people who would buy this camera would get it with the 40 XS lens, which was designed specifically to work well on this camera (and it does.)
The fact that the reviewer had bad luck with his lenses is unfortunate, I've aquired over 25 Pentax lenses over the last decade (some brand new and others made as far back as the 1960's) and I have only recieved one that had a QC issue. That lens was returned for a replacement that worked perfectly. Reviewers bad luck or my good luck?
Sorry, but as I see it, R Butler would never in a million years say the same about Canon/Nikon in their review comments because DPR knows where its bread is buttered.
Once again the samples are so poor that I am amused how can these people take such poor shots with such cameras....
I'm still trying to figure out which sample images people are impressed by in comments below.
What an impressive amount of whining just because the K01 didn't get a "real" DPR review and got a bad score. Yes, it must have been a big conspiracy due to the Canon-Nikon bias. Never mind that the K5 got more love than its Canikon counterparts. Just can't make everybody happy.
Look, Jeff Keller did a perfectly workmanlike job with the review, but the added dpreview content does nothing to change the the fact that this is a DCR cut-and-paste job, the style and tone are his, not dpreview's.
DCR tends to do 'statement of the obvious' type reports. All cameras evaluated equally, pedantically, with little analysis or insight or exploration with regards to the novel or unique points a particular model might offer. I used to expect dpreview to go further. Consistent testing and a consistent viewpoint, but actual depth as well, honest expert opinions, which made reviews interesting to read.
Maybe the K-01 was considered so flawed as not to be worth the resources of a full review. If so, fine. I would like to see the content of this site tightened up though, standards upheld. If I want to read a DCR review, I can point my browser to the DCR web site just fine, thank you.
When I look up an old camera and it's a Phil Askey review, I enjoy them more. Maybe, back in the day when things were fresher, newer, so much wasn't riding on each content. But, this site is a tremendous resource and one of many excellent reviews available. I like Imaging Resource but the forums and other content bring one back here.
@ Richard - you're being incredibly unfair on both Jeff and us. This is very far from being a 'cut-and-paste' job, as you'd know if you looked through the several pages of studio comparisons and analysis that we've added in collaboration with Jeff.
I haven't read the review yet, but something about this camera has "car crash" written all over it...
Having shot with it at indoor events, in lower light, it is comparable in speed to a sub pro canikon DSLR. However, it always gets the AF right.
When things get too dark for AF, it will still MF accurately due to focus peaking. Meanwhile, a DSLR is out of luck. The OVF will be too dark to get an accurate MF. This is not just my experience. Ask anyone who owns one.
Focus peaking is a cool feature, but it can be implemented in any camera with live view, including dSLRs.
This recent obsession with taking photos in the dark is something I don't understand. If it is to dark to use the AF, or even to focus manually in the viewfinder, what are you possibly taking photos /of/?
Megapixel race is almost over, so it's now the turn of AF. It's something like a chlid game : "Hey, my cam have 101 AF points, can focus in -10ev in 2µs and climb to 200000 iso and your camera have only 52 AF point"
Spider..........love your style and your right.
i feel that far too much attention is paid to minute or even just relatively small differences that dont always affect the real world user. Sure nice snappy AF is good, but where are we going with all of this?????
I don't have a problem with this design. Sure, there are smaller mirrorless cameras, but they have smaller sensors. With this APS-C size sensor, Pentax could have made a flatter camera by putting image stabilization into the lenses, but then you'd have something like a Sony NEX, with big chunky expensive lenses and no real reduction in carrying size or weight. Pentax opted for a big chunky camera that can stabilize the image from any K-mount lens. If I had K-mount lenses from the film era, this looks like a near-perfect digital back for them.
The problem with this Camera is the name PENTAX. Pentax should put Canon or Nikon in front ot this Camera and send it to DPR for review, In that case a great score would be posible.
It's not that its big, it's that it is a big *brick*. It is far less comfortable to hold and manipulate than the K-x for example. If it is not smaller than a dSLR, and it is not easier, simpler, or more pleasant to use than a dSLR, then what exactly is the advantage again?
That's a big "if". Well, not really, because the K-01 is smaller than any DSLR (even the cheapest, plastic-fantastic ones) and it's also not the biggest mirrorless.
Having tried one:
- it's certainly not as good as a K-mount DSLR, e.g. my K-5 is way more comfortable to hold/shoot with (having a sizable grip)
- it seems designed to be used with two hands; do that and it will be OK
- many other MILCs I've tried aren't any bit better.
I think Pentax has quite figured out that MILCs aren't really that compact; Sony NEXs can't be slid into a pocket once a lens is slapped on to the camera. So Pentax did away with the slim-mania and opted to exploit the vast range of lenses available natively with the K-mount.
DPR "dings" the K-01 for ergonomics, which would never be held against a bulky FF DLSR, nor the imbalanced NEX (more lens than camera), and paradoxically not help the petite GF3. The K-01 also gets a poor score for "value," which does not hinder the pricey OMD or boost a bargain P&S.
Gee, the thing offers full manual controls, time lapse, compatibility with plenty of lenses, easy controls, and lo and behold: a printed manual!
The styling is ingenious: it makes people smile or snicker, just what you'd like for a photo. "Hey, folks, look: a YELLOW CAMERA. Wow. Gee. Hooray." The snout of the usual DSLR is so sinister, like the face or hind of a boar, that it makes people scowl, flinch, or summon the police. Of course, if the user is equally homely, that may offer camoflage.
Let the price soften a bit, and it will sell.
It seems that you like it very much, but take into consideration that you are being subjective. For me, it looks like a disposable yellow kodak camera, it is too bulky for a mirorless, it has a slow Af and it is too expensive. I would consider buying a mirorrless if it were an olympus, it is sleak, it has some nice high quality lenses available, and has nice pocketable ones as well. The K-01 seems to be in a neutral zone, not a DSLR, not a true mirorrless. It's just not up there with the best of them in all respects, just in some.
Your comment shows you have never actually held the K-01 in your hand. I really wanted to like it, I loved the way it -looked-, but frankly the ergonomics are borderline appalling. Against al professional dSLR like the D3s, for example, there is simply no comparison.
"Against al professional dSLR like the D3s, for example, there is simply no comparison."
And with the D3s against the 645D , for example, there is simply no comparison. Does the D3s cost $700 ?
Agree with Richard -- I was predisposed towards liking it -- but feel like Pentax/Newson screwed it up when they lined up all the top-panel buttons in a straight line. I don't need to compare it to any pro DSLR -- it fails vs. every other DSLR that *Pentax* has made. I'm hoping that the K-02 (?) fixes a few of these bugaboos.
In page 11-dynamic range, the "Shadow Correction" graph is actually the "Highlight Correction" graph and vice versa. (It took me twelve hours to figure out why both looked so strange.)
So the major problem for the reviewer was the AF speed/accuracy, but you can see from this video that the K-01 has no problems locking onto targets even in low-light and the speed is more than adequate.
The more I read about this camera the more I want it, but am waiting for the recently delayed DP2 Merrill to hit the shelves to decide.
In this one the speed is rather low, and at some point it can't even lock, with the Af assist on:
It badly needs AFs lenses especially designed for this type of camera, otherwise it's just another John.
You mean it can't lock when torture tested (near EV -1, at a point it's out of metering range), with the AF assist light partially blocked by the lens hood and it's asked to focus on an empty wall? What a surprise!
Frankly, and with the maximum respect for the people working on this site, anytime a new model by Pentax reaches the shelves, the only real doubt about DP's review is where will they place the flaw, this time, and how much the final vote will be affected...
If the camera would have been from another brand from the "big bunch" the review would have oulined the unique design, unbeateable image quality and the great opportunities given by large number of customizable esternal controls... "if you are not a naturalist photographer and you think you can live up the AF relative slowlyness..." they would have written.
i love many things of this site but reviews...
that said, one of the ugliest and worst thought camera's ever, and bad news from assembly quality control, too. This is not good!
in my verrrrrry humble opinion...
Didn't this very site laud the K5 and give it a gold award?
"Didn't this very site laud the K5 and give it a gold award?"
Yes but the Pentax K-5 was perfect, they couldn't find any flaw even if they wanted ;-)
Seriously, bias is real and is unavoidable as it would be almost impossible to do tests in double-blind, except maybe for IQ. We have to live with it and it didn't deter me from buying the K10D a few years ago even if it was panned for so-called "soft JPEG" by dpr.
By looking at its studio RAW shots, its very obvious there is serious in camera NR in use. High ISO images has very smeared out micro details.
This means this is not a good camera for B&W shooting with artificial looking noise structure. I prefer to do NR with PP software.
I think Pentax got it wrong with this camera. If you see it alongside other mirrorless cameras it looks very bulky as a result of its greater depth.
Pentax seems to have been concerned with having compatibility with its slr lenses, but they have designed something with such a large flange back distance, that it largely defeats the object of it being a mirrorless camera, as the review correctly emphasises.
A notable disadvantage of the longer flange back distance is that the K-01 can not use the recently announced Sigma lenses (first third party AF lenses for mirrorless systems) or use any lenses made for older rangefinder cameras, such as those for Leica M or screw mount.
A more sensible answer to the problem of compatibility with slr lenses would be to supply a dedicated adaptor which permits AF. Even this would not solve the AF speed issue. Obtaining higher AF speeds with CD-AF cameras really needs lenses to be specially designed for them, with internal focussing.
The K-01 is the perfect companion to the K-7 user who wanted full manual control in video mode. The people who use the K-01 are happy with them . Go look at the Nex-5N with $600 A-mount adapter and you will see why Pentax did it this way. The K-01 has 24 million K-mount lenses out there and everyone has IS since SR is built in. I even use my Pentax 67 MF lenses on the K-01 and it has AF with 67 lenses like my 165mm F2.8 with Pentax 1.7x AF adapter.
could you please tell us the main use you make out of it (meaning portraiture, street, arc, whatelse...)
It's a friggen camera so it could shoot anything your heart desires people.
The "$600 A-mount adaptor" is presumably a reference to the Sony LA-EA2, which incorporates a mirror arrangement to implement Phase detect AF. Adaptors without this function (e.g. Sony LA-EA1) are much cheaper.
When you look at the K-01 overall, you see the disadvantages of the longer flange back distance as I mentioned above, you see it has to try to use CD-AF with slr lenses, that it has no EVF and also has rolling shutter issues. All of this combined gives the impression of a badly implemented mirrorless design.
The principal reason for the design is surely that Pentax did not want to produce a range of dedicated lenses for mirrorless cameras.
"If you see it alongside other mirrorless cameras it looks very bulky as a result of its greater depth."
I don't see Sony NEXs being anywhere near compact or non-bulky with any lens mounted on. Unless the Pentax DA 40 XS can be mounted natively on a NEX-7 will I truly call it a "pocketable MILC".
If price go down like 15%, this camera is a very good deal, for those with Pentax glass. Can be good for street shooter prime lens maniacs too. Also for travellers with the 18-135 zoom. Or for anybody who is going for the techy look. This review is unable to predict market success. This camera is having too many good selling points for the non-experts.
The final judgement on success the turnover figures will tell anyway.
The score on ergonomics and handling is too low. Sure it isn't the best, but give it some leeway, for it's off beat design. Which you are simply not used to. Also the value score is too low. The picture quality it delivers is way above par and pricing? €829 is not realistic. In Holland you van buy it voor €200 less.
Also I do not think blaming it for poor AF on old or cheap tele zooms is fair, since those behave poorly on any dslr and are not available on other system camera's anyway. You are beating it up for a drawback from a big advantage of the camera, but dismiss this advantage (K-mount almost all together) Quality glass will always deliver better AF (and there is plenty of that around from Pentax, sigma, Tamron and some other brands.) Focus peeking will also be great for MF, which is a great advantage because of the huge amount of hight quality but cheap glass from the 70's en eighties you can get for almost nothing.
It would have been nice to have reviewed this camera with a broader view. In my opinion it deserves 73%. It's not an om-d e-m5 which is a very well balanced package, but it is a great camera with drawbacks, that real photographers can work around.
Have you held one? The ergonomics are objectively poor, with many important controls such as the mode dial being difficult to reach from either the left or right hand. Looking different is not a free pass for being hard to use.
Also all the screw-drive lenses, including the brand new 40mm pancake, focus slower than the comparable native designs on other mirrorless systems.
Personally I think they ruined great internal technology by putting it all in a gigantic, awkward body. Unless you're on a budget the K-5 or even K-30 seems like a much better option in every respect.
Actually no, the IQ is not 'way above par' - it is excellent but no better than comparable offerings from Sony or Olympus.
@Andy I have held one and loved the ergo. So no they are not objectively poor, thats your opinion and in this case matches with reviewer who it seems has anti pentax bias.
i've used every DSLR/ILC since 1996 and the K-01 (which I confess I actually quite like the look of) has some of the worst ergonomics and most annoyingly slow autofocus I can remember. It's usable with the pancake lens but I found myself cursing it when using a zoom (and when trying to use the screen in bright light). And this is a camera I really wanted to like. If nothing else it serves to remind me why we liked the K5 so much. I do like the IQ with the 40 tho.
okey, simon let me ask you, how many of the mirrorless cameras without VF you found using screen in bright light was as good as dslrs?? Further pentax K-01 comes with 1 specially designed lens and do you think it was that slow with that lens, i did not find the autofocus to be that slow with it. Further do you know any mirrorless camera that AF very fast with lenses not designed for it. (exception may be sony ). The point is i have never seen you voicing all these with any other model. You have made your dislike for Q and K-01 quite earlier and frankly i did not expect your review to be any different than what it is. You may have used every dslr from 1996 but your thinking is from 1970s, you like classic designs and you do not have open mind. You may not like what i am writing but this is my observation. BTW I have also tried all cameras from 2004 because i live near to yodobashi shop. This is one of the perks of living in japan. I do not agree with you that ergo of k-01 is disaster.
living near a camera store and using a camera exclusively for a month or more are not the same thing. I am not wedded to 1970's design. As i mentioned I liked the K-01's design, which ironically look to my eye to be highly influenced by Deiter Rams' work for Braun in the 1970s. The big difference is that Rams put as much emphasis on the functionality of the product as he did on the aesthetics. The point about lenses 'not designed for it' is somewhat disingenuous since there's only one lens 'designed for' the K-01. If pentax didn't intend it to be used with K-mount lenses why didn't they introduce a new mount with a shorter flange-back distance?
Even as a Pentax user I can't help but agree with the score on ergonimics. Handling it is going to be very difficult coming from an SLR standpoint.
This is one of those stuff where form preceded function as it was conceptualized. It's not everybody's camera.
There seem to be a problem with the lense. On studio shot the center is sharp, but the "Paul smith" on the watch is really blurry. It's a good camera, but for me the price is wrong, it's the same price than the new K-30, witch is a small camera too, have 100% OVF, is weather resistant and share the same sensor and af, only missing the mic input..
Thank goodness real customers have more diverse tastes than reviewers.
and you seriously think those 3 customers will pay for the R&D and manufacturing costs to make this product profitable for Pentax ?
There is no much R&D involved to remove mirror, viewfinder and PDAF system from K-30 and make a different body for it.
The review says the K-01 is the largest mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, but to my eyes it's smaller than the X Pro 1:
It's true the K-01 is deeper, but with a lens attached (in other words a camera, not a body) it's comparable there too.
Just wondering how to interpret this. It seems to suggest DPR don't consider the X Pro 1 a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. Or perhaps they consider a lens as optional?
The body of the K-01 is much boxier, being 59mm deep vs 42.5 mm for the X Pro 1. The K-01 also weights 24% more.
Is it 1982 again already?
Just going to echo some comments here: I was a bit taken back after reading the first page of the review. Totally different style writing, so I went and checked and who wrote it. Jeff Keller is a great reviewer, but I expected a dpreview review. That's why I like this place, the style of writing, the analysis, and the objective point of view.
Jeff's writing is filled with "I's" and opinion-like statements. Its a bit off putting. While I appreciate dpreview's recruitment of Jeff, I'd prefer if future reviews of "popular" cameras (like Pentax's first APS-C mirrorless) be written by dpreview staff. I value the opinions and observations they make. I don't mean to discount Jeff's observations... I think he should be left to do compact round ups or other more minor reviews, where people only read those reviews to check for dp's robust lab/objective tests.
I agree that Jeff's sound is off-putting. It sounds like a bar brawl. It doesn't fit in. He needs serious editing. (By the way, i believe you can sound entertaining without sounding all too rambling at the same time.)
I also stumbled at this sentence in the conclusion:
- "all lenses will have shake reduction built-in, courtesy of sensor-shift IS system"
I understand what you mean, still the sentence is plain wrong and annoying. Better say something like:
- "all lenses profit from the camera's built-in shake reduction"
And while we're at it, i think the terms IS and SR are used intermittently throughout the review, which is confusing too.
well I disagree! I normally find dpr's reviews to be quite tedious and 'safe' (if that's the right term). They sit on the fence too much with their reviews in order not to offend. If a reviewer thinks a camera or one of its features is terrible etc I'd want to know.
John, i don't mind clear words. Still they should not come in a rather ordinary voice. I do see your point though and maybe DPR could be a bit more "explicit" occasionally.
We'd have loved to review the K-01 but in a Photokina year it just wouldn't have happened for months. So we decided to collaborate with Jeff, whos work we have a lot of respect for, to get a decent length (albeit shorter than a full 'in-depth') review out in good time.
This free'd up our in-house resources to do other things, some of which you've seen, some of which are still to come.
Barney, thanks for the background. Still in a site as polished as this, you'd expect the text to be homogenous as well. Then again, it is free quality information, so who am i to complain.
Barney, its unfortunate that you wouldn't have time to release the review of the K01 in a timely manner if it was done in house. Still, I'd love to see reviewing priority on new designs/interfaces, and perhaps leave Jeff to review "old bodies with new sensors".
I can't help but feel that dpreview staff would have been slightly more detailed, more descriptive, and more analytical about the handling of the K01. Like the K7 and K5, there were key sentences that described and compared its grip and handling, commending its small design yet comfortable grip. These are things I'm looking to find in the K01 review, but they remain absent, or under described.
If you guys intend to have Jeff review new bodies/interfaces (Like the Pentax Q), I highly suggest expanding on the interface/handling parts of the review to give users a better view of the camera as a whole. I'd love to see the collaborative opinion of the handling of such bodies.
I really dont get it. This is a very odd camera. I do think dslrs will eventually be replaced with larger pro mirrorless cameras that use slr mounts. but this just feels odd and maybe a bit premature
Mirrorless with SLR mounts? That's odd by definition.
absolutley not eventually it will make more sense to make top end dslrs mirrorless. f mount and eos arent goin anywhere
K-mount mirrorless truly is pointless. I know there was a contingent of Pentax users trumpeting the virtues of legacy compatibility in the forums but it brings far more negatives than positives, even more so with the lack of swiveling screen.
Enough with this and the Q. If you want to compete in the mirrorless market, put out a real mirrorless camera and not just a concept that miraculously escaped containment at Pentax HQ.
" If you haven't been following along, that's a K-mount in the picture, and it supports virtually every Pentax lens ever made."
EVERY Pentax lens???
Are we to assume that the 42X...something (don't remember the pitch) screw thread lenses were NOT made by Pentax? (OK, I'll admit they were made by other manufacturers as well but, I seem to recall that the mount in question was called 42mmm Pentax Thread)
DAMN, this stuff makes me feel old!!!!!
If you distinguish between "natively support" and just "support", the statement may feel more correct.
K-mount and M42 has the same flange focal distance, so a simple and small adapter will do. Also medium format (645/67) lenses will fit, but with bulky adapters.
Lenses not supported will then be Auto 110 and the new Q-mount lenses.
In this interpretation of support, all of the other mirrorless cameras has better support for old glass, so I'm not really sure what to make of the statement. The main point for me (if I were to buy a K-01) would definitely be in body auto-focus support for the K-mount lenses.
Yup, worst score in a while, and yet best samples gallery since a long time. There are probably many good reasons for that, but still it does not make much sense to me.
Seems the image quality was one of few real pluses, and the reviewer deducted mostly for the non-compact size that makes it near pointless compared to a DSLR.
If you reed the conclusion the excellent image quality was offset by poor size, ergonomics and autofocus speed.
I suppose a firmware update won't take care of the fugly design...
.......unless transformers is the 1.02 update.!!! Lol
I agree on a personal note, its a very polarizing design and it aint polarising in my direction.
Also, the 69% (practically 70) score is realistic if you think from a purely photo technical usage point of view against the known best of all areas in modern camera technology.
When the K5 and Kx scored so high when they came out its easy to see how this score is arrived at. Does this make it a bad camera.....NO !!!
Its horses for courses, which on the face of it doesnt make for good reading, but when real world users (non forumites) arent worried about the AF or VF or size, then whats left, oh thats right ......very very good IQ. Then its job done.
The major flow of this camera is the missing of an EVF. The second one is the K mount. No problem to make the camera thinner and mount the K lenses with an adapter.
I appreciate the "cat" pictures. They have to be in every review.
Simon, appreciate you have a point of view, but smart phone users dont consider this a flaw, they consider it a benefit.
why is a camera flawed if it doesnt suit you, go buy a DSLR or similar, which i am sure you have. Just trying to get people to think outside the square and what millions of real world average people out there actually want. Perhaps Pentax did their market research right????
Solarider.....agreed, its not for forum junky gurus
Take one look, open your mind, think laterally,consider people who arent DSLR, MILC lovers. Its for the phone crowd, fashion conscious and some getting stunning macros.
The review was bang on, but your links are typical real world users who arent worried about blinding AF, but moving on from smart phones and loving the IQ.
I dont know how well it sell, but as a marketing tool for mostly non traditional photographers its excellent. I probably wont buy one myself, but I can see who would. Yes AF is not exactly Pentax's strong point up till now, but they have a lot of other qualities lost on many.
It does seem to have a negative effect on the traditional DSLR market who seem to think its a joke. Will that harm Pentax sales of K30 etc......one wouldnt think so, because the negative comment people will always stick to their own prefered camera or brand regardless.
But would my wife or daughter want one........hell yes !!
Someone should tell your wife and daughter then that all they have to do is ask. ;-)
If it's a marketting tool for 'non-traditional photographers' then why the hell did they base it on the K-mount, which is ONLY going to appeal to buyers with an existing stock (or interest in) of Pentax lenses...? Do you really think the smartphone upgrader will care if you can mount an FA Ltd 31mm?
I don't think even Pentax knows what the K-01 is for...
I would think this camera is a rushed-out product.
Either...too lazy to properly design the mirrorless internal specs or do not have the means to do so.
Look very much like taking one of the existing DSLR, remove the mirror & prism..get some unknown to design the outer shell...and wooh-lah...Pentax is now officially in the mirrorless league...
Marc Newson is anything BUT unknown... This does not mean that his K-01 design must be to anyone's liking by default, but fair is fair. I bet you haven't heard of Philippe Starck either. Or maybe Giugiaro or Bertone?...
oh really...
so what camera has he designed before this bright brick?
He is a freelance industrial designer, mate, and he is a big name. He designs whatever he is appointed. This is his first camera. If you're interested in his other works, just google or wiki it. You may not like its works but his name gives kudos to any product.
yup, that explains. he never designed a camera before.
honestly, he should stick to designing anything but camera.
What?! Where is the 82%? :D
Wake up and smell the coffee moment - it's for the phone crowd.
Wake up and smell the coffe again, it's for smart shooters:
This camera has nothing to attract people with, except its awful design.
i think the photo samples in the review are the best in a long time here on dpreview reviews. good work reviewer!
They do look amazing, better IQ than in most including OM-D samples.
Jeff had some issues with bad lenses. I do not know if it was QC or shipping damage. Either way, his experience was not the norm. However, DPR chose to use this outlier review as their own. That should be a red flag.
Having owned one for a while, I know it is smaller than a DSLR. I also know the usability is very good.
AF performance is complicated. In bright light, it is slower than a DSLR. As the light goes down, it maintains its speed. At medium low light, it is competitive with a DSLR. It's AF will cease to be usable before that of a better DSLR. However, in really low light, focus peaking allows accurate MF while a DSLR would be hopeless.
For product shots, macro, street, and creative shooting, it is a fantastic tool. Go check out the Pentax DSLR forum. there are some great shots done with this camera. The people who use it do understand the camera and what it can do. It is not a sports camera but it does make a less expensive alternative to an M9 or Pro 1.
Finally some sane comments from an actual user. The 40 2.8 is a sharp little Tessar design lens like the DA 40. The output from this camera is as good as it gets and the 920K LCD with peaking is implemented really well.
Puzzling dismissive comments and a head scratcher of a review.
It is a joy to use for street shooting. It is amazing what you can do with a very high quality camera that is no longer attached to your face. There is a lot more capability as far as framing and perspective. One is also far less conspicuous as well. I can get more, good shots taken due to its form factor. Plus, the images are fantastic.
I can say from personal experience that the AF is as good as my E-PL1 and better than my ex X100. Image quality IMO is better than any camera i have owned.
JoeDaBassPlayer writes:
"AF performance is complicated. In bright light, it is slower than a DSLR. As the light goes down, it maintains its speed. At medium low light, it is competitive with a DSLR. It's AF will cease to be usable before that of a better DSLR. However, in really low light, focus peaking allows accurate MF while a DSLR would be hopeless."
Focus peaking has been on the Sony SLT's for a while now and is on the Nex line as well but the AF of the A series SLT's will beat this Pentax to a pulp performance-wise in any light,
Still NR applied in RAW at high ISO...disappointing. It's a good sensor already
Funny. Many questioned the look of the camera.
I actually like this unique look. 'Avant Garde' style! Images looks very good, too. But I really like to see BETTER sample photos. The sample photos are......yarn.....sleeeeepy.
Ditto on the samples. I was hoping for a good gallery instead of a rehash of Jeff's stuff. The camera can supply some stunning images. Rehashing Jeff's issues and then his bad images does not do this camera nor its designers justice.
Modern look - plus!
Slow AF - minus!
No VF - minus!
... stopped reading after that as it looks like a failure in the current market.
One step forward, two steps back from Pentax IMO.
*sigh* Pentax, such a quirky company - at least they tried something a bit new. Alas, it seems this one needs to go back to the drawing board.
As to the DPR detractors that shout "Isn't IQ everything!?!" Erm, no, no it isn't. If it was, then we'd all be shooting with large 4x5 or higher MF cameras because their IQ is amazing.
There's a thing called "usability". If you're camera has very good IQ but actually using it to get those nice shots is a pain in the rear, then the score should reflect that as appropriate.
Really, this camera offers little to nothing better than the K-5 and a lot of drawbacks.
I can see it MAYBE taking off in Asia due to the styling (as it does look to have that Eastern flare) but looks to be luke-warm elsewhere.
Usability cannot be stressed enough. Cameras that are hard to use eventually get left in the cupboard once the novelty of the new purchase wares off.
I also think aps-c is the wrong starting point for mirror-less cameras. Yes it delivers very good IQ but even if you can make the camera small (as with the Sony Nex) the lenses are still large.
With this Pentax you get large lenses and a large body so it seems completely pointless to me.
I think Olympus and to a slightly lesser extant Panasonic are the only two manufacturers who "get" the concept.
If I could afford the luxury of a smaller alternative to my Sony A77 it would be a no-brainer to go for one of the Oly's. Why would I want the alternative to my SLR to be bulky?
Yes the IQ of the 4/3 range may be a bit less but I would accept that for the convenience. If quality is paramount then I would use the A77 anyway.
Oddie: "With this Pentax you get large lenses and a large body so it seems completely pointless to me. "
The K-01 offers better AF in video mode than you'd get with a DSLR. The a77 is a much bigger camera. NEX's have a pecular center of gravity. A shoot off comparison of the m4/3 vs the K-01 in low lit would be interesting. It may be cheaper to find a fast legacy K lens than buy a new m4/3 fast prime.
"The K-01 offers better AF in video mode than you'd get with a DSLR."
Actually no, you get absolutely no C-AF in video with k-01, and S-AF, quote, "slow and noisy".
Love the continued contributions from Jeff and also Andy from eoshd. Bringing in top flight talent is always a smart move.
I applaud Pentax for trying something new, but this is just a failure. It takes the worst traits of both the SLR and mirrorless formats and combines them into one weird camera that excels at nothing.
How does the K-01 excel at nothing when IQ is as good as it gets in the mirror-less market segment?
As far a slow focus, it's not that slow, and besides for static subjects Live View with MF is the way to go anyway, and peaking is a wonderful feature.
Knowing that the K-01 gives you K-5 IQ which is as good or better than the very best ILCs and APS-C cameras on the market, I don't understand all the dismissive comments at all. Is everybody so into spray and pray, point and press AF photography that they cannot focus a camera with Live View if necessary?
AF does work and is very accurate. It is slower in good light but does not really drop in speed until it starts to get fairly dark. For indoor shots, it can go against most DSLR's for speed. AF accuracy is not an issue.
It has k5 IQ but so does a k5 which is about the same size and price. This also has none of the performance of the k5. If you use the evf the k5 is mirrorless too.
Sorry last reply was on my tablet so I made some errors. I meant to say that while the k01 has very good IQ, so do most DSLRs (like the k5). Those DSLRs also have liveview modes that operate like the K01, but this K-01 does not have a high performance mode or a viewfinder. So what's the benefit? A tiny bit less height of camera?
great review on the little ... Hummer. :) Thank you, folks.
I'm chalking this one up as a first step for Pentax.
Not great by any stretch, but... a beginning nonetheless.
I just hope that Pentax's takes the criticism from this model and uses it to deliver something much better next round.
At least it's not wood paneled like that sigma ...good work pentax
The 69% review score is a gift for this deeply flawed camera.
No viewfinder and slow and dodgy auto-focus in a $900 camera?
Pentax, what were you thinking?
Yeah. Im going to agree with you on this. It could have been a great camera. Even with how thick it is(due to all of the great lenses). They need to implement PDAF.
The Nikon 1 has blazing fast PDAF, excellent IQ, fast write times and menu performance, and it scored only 2 points higher than the K-01 and was not even recommended.
The Nikon 1 with kit lens compacted is every bit as thick as the K 01 and XS40. AF is fast but IQ is bad in comparison.
Nikon V1 will focus better in low indoor light but image quality noticeably poorer than the Pentax (and the Pentax with focus peaking will manually focus quite nicely in low light).
@JoeDaBassPlayer I know the K-01 has better IQ. Someone above said Pentax needs to implement PDAF. My point was that Nikon out of all mirror-less camera makers DID implement PDAF, and still got poor marks from DPR.
This is gonna get ugly.
Not pentax and have never used this camera, but if "style/looks" contribute to the final score, then its bang on!
Jeezel Petes, you think they'd at least test the lenses that are being sent out for review by the media. Honestly folks, every Pentax lens I've ever owned has been perfect right out of the box, I really haven't even noticed any FF/BF issues, they're not all this bad. Some days I'm ashamed of my brand.
The lack of a view finder is a fatal flaw, sorry Pentax. I like the fact that Pentax thinks a bit outside the box, but this camera is more about design than taking photographs. The cart is definitely in front of the horse.
If it had a viewfinder, it would be a K5. This is supposed to be more compact, while retaining the K mount. I'm tempted, I have 3 SMC-M primes.
I am not sure if you have actually held this camera. I did and did along with the K5. K-01 is as big as K5 without a viewfinder. It is not compact at all. In fact Pentax's lower end models are smaller than this camera. I am a huge pentax fan, but this is a very poorly designed camera. The main purpose of a mirrorless camera is smaller size and this isn't that, mainly because pentax didn't want to make lenses with a different mount.
Yeah, mirrorless are supposed to be more compact. But keeping the K mount made that an impossible feat. So now it isn't compact, but doesn't have any of the performance of a DSLR.
I have the smallest Pentax DSLR and the K 01 is smaller.
They should have created and adapter..... 2 lines of lenses, native k mount (CDAF) and non native (PDAF). That would've allowed them to reduce size of body dramtically (one of the major complaints), and also create CDAF lenses (even if only in future... smaller, and faster AF).
Perhaps they shouldve taken a leaf from Micro 4/3s book.
technically, the K 01 is the smallest, but in real world usage, it's the same size as the other Pentax DSLR:
@JackM "If it had a viewfinder, it would be a K5. This is supposed to be more compact, while retaining the K mount. I'm tempted, I have 3 SMC-M primes."
The Sony Nex 7 has an outstanding EVF and it certainly isn't an A77. True it has a different lens mount but it shows an EVF can be added to a mirror-less camera without turning it back into an SLR
I agree with Dan. The lack of a viewfinder and the inability to add one is definitely the fatal flaw here. IMO, focus peaking is just the gimmick du jour. The slow focusing and poor LCD in bright sun makes the ergonomics score low too.
Even some owners of compact cameras often complain about the lack of an optical viewfinder. My 84 year old mother refused to use one. I had to lend her an old Pentax Optio that had one for her travels. How can Pentax think it's ok to leave off the viewfinder on this camera? Where's the engineering sense? Where's the marketing sense? Did they really think there were that many point and shoot upgraders out there who'd not notice the lack of a viewfinder or novices who would not care?
Other than this, I think the camera is really good looking. I love innovative looks and Pentax did a good job here, IMO. I love the colors too. There's nothing ugly about it to me, but form needs to follow function and that's where they failed unfortunately.
ok, scratch my earlier comment. I am no longer interested.
Connect with dpreview


text:
Memory cards are some of the most important commodities that a person can have. These cards are used in some of the most common electronic devices that on uses, like a digital camera, a cellular phone, and MP3 players, for instance. The more memory you have, the more files that you can store in your phone or any other device that uses the card.
Now how much memory are we looking at? It depends on the device as well as your needs. Some devices can recognize only a maximum amount of memory. Some devices can read up to 4 gigabytes only of memory, while others can go up to 16 gigabytes. As a result, memory cards are increasing in capacities as well. Nowadays you can find SD and MicroSD 32GB cards. Almost like a hard drive all by itself, actually. Now with a 32 gigabyte card, you do a lot of things with your portable device.
Store More Files
Now with the increased capacities of a MicroSD 32GB card, you now have more room for your important files. Smartphones that can read up to 32 gigabytes of MicroSD memory can now have more for important documents, presentations and other files that the owner may deem important to his work or his business. In addition, a photographer can take more raw pictures with his gear if he uses 32 gigabytes of memory for his camera. These are only two examples of the applications that the expanded memory of the MicroSD 32GB card can help out.
Memory-dependent consumer electronic devices have always relied upon the computer to back their files up, and as a result, the owner has to often transfer his files over to the computer so he can have more fresh room in the electronic device's memory to store new files. That can be a hassle sometimes, but with the expanded memory that the 32GB memory card can offer you, you can take more pictures or copy more files and still have a longer time in between transferring files from the memory card to the PC.
If your device can support the new 32 gigabyte cards, it is time that you should upgrade to these memory cards so you can have more room to put your files when you're using your electronic device. You can get one of these storage media cheap in the Internet, where a lot of stores are selling the product.


text:
Series 1 Episode 1
A single dad and his daughter from NYC move to the 'burbs.
In the first season of this clever comedy, 16-year-old Tessa is uprooted from her beloved New York City and planted in the suburban "purgatory" of Chatswin. But the suburbs aren't all bad, as Tessa and her dad, George, discover.
Comedy, Drama
Not yet rated
A single dad and his daughter from NYC move to the 'burbs.
Tessa's oddly attracted to her jock neighbour (PARKER YOUNG).
George joins the PTA and Tessa revamps the school newspaper.
Fearing a burglary, Dallas and Dalia stay with the Altmans
It's Tessa's first suburban Halloween. JAY MOHR guest stars.
Tessa tries to motivate the school to do charity work.
Tessa celebrates her "sweet 16" birthday.
It's Thanksgiving at the Royces'. JAY MOHR guest stars.
George finds himself under the mistletoe ... but with whom?
George tries to join the country club.
Tessa is convinced the new guy (DAN BYRD) is gay.
George and the guys take on Atlantic City.
Tessa becomes less attracted to Scott (THOMAS McDONELL).
Tessa decides to run for student body president.
Is George jealous of Dallas's new beau (WILMER VALDERRAMA)?
Fred Shay (CHRIS PARNELL) thinks Sheila is hot for George.
Tessa joins the workforce. ROBIN GIVENS guest stars
JAMES LIPTON guest stars as Dalia's therapist.
George becomes smitten with a woman (ALICIA SILVERSTONE).
George and Eden's (ALICIA SILVERSTONE) relationship grows.
Tessa adjusts to Eden (ALICIA SILVERSTONE) living with them.
It's Mothers' Day in the season finale. JAMES INGRAM sings.